From: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
To: Eric Farman <farman@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Farhan Ali <alifm@linux.ibm.com>,
Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>,
linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/9] vfio-ccw: Rearrange pfn_array and pfn_array_table arrays
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2019 18:02:32 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190613180232.3cbea661.cohuck@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190606202831.44135-6-farman@linux.ibm.com>
On Thu, 6 Jun 2019 22:28:27 +0200
Eric Farman <farman@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> While processing a channel program, we currently have two nested
> arrays that carry a slightly different structure. The direct CCW
> path creates this:
>
> ccwchain->pfn_array_table[1]->pfn_array[#pages]
>
> while an IDA CCW creates:
>
> ccwchain->pfn_array_table[#idaws]->pfn_array[1]
>
> The distinction appears to state that each pfn_array_table entry
> points to an array of contiguous pages, represented by a pfn_array,
> um, array. Since the direct-addressed scenario can ONLY represent
> contiguous pages, it makes the intermediate array necessary but
> difficult to recognize. Meanwhile, since an IDAL can contain
> non-contiguous pages and there is no logic in vfio-ccw to detect
> adjacent IDAWs, it is the second array that is necessary but appearing
> to be superfluous.
>
> I am not aware of any documentation that states the pfn_array[] needs
> to be of contiguous pages; it is just what the code does today.
> I don't see any reason for this either, let's just flip the IDA
> codepath around so that it generates:
>
> ch_pat->pfn_array_table[1]->pfn_array[#idaws]
>
> This will bring it in line with the direct-addressed codepath,
> so that we can understand the behavior of this memory regardless
> of what type of CCW is being processed. And it means the casual
> observer does not need to know/care whether the pfn_array[]
> represents contiguous pages or not.
>
> NB: The existing vfio-ccw code only supports 4K-block Format-2 IDAs,
> so that "#pages" == "#idaws" in this area. This means that we will
> have difficulty with this overlap in terminology if support for
> Format-1 or 2K-block Format-2 IDAs is ever added. I don't think that
> this patch changes our ability to make that distinction.
I agree; and knowing that later patches will simplify things further, I
think it will even be easier to do than on the current code base.
>
> Signed-off-by: Eric Farman <farman@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
> drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_cp.c | 26 +++++++++++---------------
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-13 16:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-06 20:28 [PATCH v2 0/9] s390: vfio-ccw code rework Eric Farman
2019-06-06 20:28 ` [PATCH v2 1/9] s390/cio: Squash cp_free() and cp_unpin_free() Eric Farman
2019-06-12 11:07 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-06-06 20:28 ` [PATCH v2 2/9] s390/cio: Refactor the routine that handles TIC CCWs Eric Farman
2019-06-12 11:17 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-06-06 20:28 ` [PATCH v2 3/9] s390/cio: Generalize the TIC handler Eric Farman
2019-06-12 11:18 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-06-06 20:28 ` [PATCH v2 4/9] s390/cio: Use generalized CCW handler in cp_init() Eric Farman
2019-06-12 11:18 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-06-06 20:28 ` [PATCH v2 5/9] vfio-ccw: Rearrange pfn_array and pfn_array_table arrays Eric Farman
2019-06-13 16:02 ` Cornelia Huck [this message]
2019-06-06 20:28 ` [PATCH v2 6/9] vfio-ccw: Adjust the first IDAW outside of the nested loops Eric Farman
2019-06-13 16:02 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-06-06 20:28 ` [PATCH v2 7/9] vfio-ccw: Remove pfn_array_table Eric Farman
2019-06-13 16:03 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-06-06 20:28 ` [PATCH v2 8/9] vfio-ccw: Rearrange IDAL allocation in direct CCW Eric Farman
2019-06-14 9:42 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-06-06 20:28 ` [PATCH v2 9/9] s390/cio: Combine direct and indirect CCW paths Eric Farman
2019-06-14 10:01 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-06-14 10:30 ` Eric Farman
2019-06-14 10:03 ` [PATCH v2 0/9] s390: vfio-ccw code rework Cornelia Huck
2019-06-17 13:32 ` Cornelia Huck
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190613180232.3cbea661.cohuck@redhat.com \
--to=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=alifm@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=farman@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pasic@linux.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).